ajperk said:
I have gotten the impression over the past several years that Canon seems to be stumbling a lot in the video arena. Every release appears to either be considerably more expensive than the direct competition, or is considerably crippled relative to the direct competition. Is this impression accurate?
I don't think it is all that fair.
Nikon launched the first DSLR with video in the shape of the D90, Canon quickly followed with the 5D2 and the 500D. The close proximity of these products does not infer a reaction release, i.e. just to keep up with Nikon, as the R&D would have probably taken place over years not months, or weeks.
The Nikon had a few caveats, single frame rate, 720 resolution etc, but even the hallowed 5D2 was imperfect at launch, no PAL friendly frame rates, no manual exposure (until a later firmware fixed this), the 500D was even worse, with reduced 20fps frame rate and full auto exposure.
It actually took until the 7D before Canon launched a sorted design that didn't feel like an afterthought. The full frame rates were there, including a PAL friendly 25fps. Full exposure modes. And it was also, for it's time, a cracking stills camera offering pretty decent value.
Canon also had a major advantage in terms of the mount, RED, the early large sensor camera pioneer, had EF mount versions of it's cameras. You could use the stills lenses you already had, or you could buy very decent lenses for less than their PL equivalents.
ajperk said:
I am particularly curious because I have heard a LOT of complaints about Canon's stills products, usually regarding the sensors (i.e. DR and shadow noise) but also with regards to crippling for greater product differentiation. Regardless, I have personally been satisfied with the Canon DSLRs I've owned and used.
I think Canon were caught unawares with the success of their new videoDSLRs, and the new market they virtually created (a complete ready to shoot 550D for example was the 10th of the price of a RED body) and so hadn't figured on including decent audio connects, headphone sockets, or things like manual timecode, zebra, peaking and so on and so on.
Canon did launch some more dedicated video cameras based around an APS-C sensor, and with an EF mount (PL versions were also available) and yes, compared to a 550D they looked like poor value. To a stills market obsessed with so called full frame, APS-C seemed like a daft choice for the money (no matter that it is closer to s35, and so fits nice with PL mount s35 lenses) but were actually excellent. Great to use. All the connectivity you could want. Stable codecs. Brilliant in low light. But not exciting in the same way that flakey black magic launches were.
People who thought the C300 was overpriced should have looked at comparable REDs or Alexas. The c300 was not aimed at photographers who fancied themselves as DoPs (biiiiiiig difference) the c300 was aimed at film-makers. To whom c300 was half the price of the XDCAMs they had been using.
Enterprising folks like MagicLantern added some of the display functionality that pros wanted, making the 550ds and the 5D2s far more usable (focus peaking, particularly on a large sensor is a godsend) I don't think canon were intentionally leaving these things out, just that they still saw there primary use as stills, and were making some very nice XF codec based camcorders and brilliant cinema series cameras for the folk who they thought should be buying them.
I don't see a conspiracy. Behind the curve perhaps. A knock on effect of the terrible earthquakes and tsunamis that devastated swathes of Japan, things just slowed down.
Canon stuck with the 18MP sensor for too long, whilst Panasonic were doing reasonably great things with their GH series, folk spending daft money on hyperfast primes.. it seemed Canon were lagging behind.
I think they still are in terms of marketing, but then I don't think the market is particularly crying out for a cheap 4K camera just yet. I hope canon launch something better sorted than we've seen from the a7s and gh4. It's not the XC10 by the looks of things. It'll be the 5D4 or the next rebel. And it won't need CFast 2.0.
EVERYBODY scoffed at Canon when they launched the c300. No 4k they scoffed. What did everybody at a broadcast level end up using? The c300. That was a single cost. A single box. One record button. Everything built in. Great images.
Canon are being very sensible, generally. in my opinion. They kind of fudged the 5D2 and 500D... and I hope will spend more time getting it right for 4K.
